Biblical Forensics©


“Jesuit Deception on the Rapture”

Part 2


This series will help readers understand why there is great confusion among the Christian community at large and why we have so many differing views pertaining to the Rapture, particularly, the Pre-Tribulation Rapture. First, let us keep in mind that Jesus Christ warned us in Mathew 7:15, “Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.”

The Third Jesuit Superior-General, Francis Borgia once said, “We came in like lambs and will rule like wolves”. The name “Borgia” is synonymous with deception, double-dealing, betrayal, treachery, death, corruption, and their particular chosen method to murder, the “Borgia Cup” of poison. Many times people who opposed them, or were just in their way, seemed to drop down dead. Some maintained that it was cantarella, a poison favored by the Borgias. Most historians believe that it was a compound of arsenic. Arsenic poison, if dosed right, didn't kill instantly. Its victim got sicker and sicker, and over a number of months and died quietly.

On October 14th, 2016, the Jesuits elected Arturo Sosa to be the 31st Superior-General. He will serve as their “Black Pope” and the real power behind the Vatican. Public photos of Fr. Sosa portray him as a handsome and charming man of Venezuelan roots. His predecessor, Adolfo Nicolás was usually pictured in public with a stern and sometimes unfriendly facial expression.

Most people do not differentiate between Jesuits and other Catholic Orders of priests. This assumption leads to a serious and flawed conclusion. Jesuits are not religious priests in the traditional sense of the word. They are secular and are not permitted to officiate at marriages and baptisms, as are all other religious orders. The Jesuits are commonly referred to as the pope’s militia or Marines. They received Vatican sanction by Pope Paul III in 1540, a mistake the Papacy would later come to regret. Their sole reason for existence was to conduct the anti-Reformation Inquisition and to return the Reformers back to submission to the Vatican. They are pledged by blood oath to restore Papal authority throughout and over the world. Their success gives testament to the fact that the “White” Pope Francis (a first for Jesuits) has been elected to the Papacy. This did not come about with ease because he was supposed to be elected to the position rather than Pope Benedict XVI. Instead, Pope Benedict was selected and elected when a group of voting Cardinals, on their final vote, teamed up and switched their vote thereby electing Cardinal Ratzinger as the new pope and freezing Giorgio Bergoglio out.

As a Jesuit, Pope Francis has held some of the highest positions in Argentina, including that of Provincial Superior and Archbishop of Buenos Aires. It was Pope John Paul II who made Bergoglio a cardinal on February 21, 2001. There is great fear of Jesuits within the Vatican regarding the Jesuit hierarchy, especially if you are not one of them.

Because of their constant meddling in the affairs of sovereign states, Clement III faced tremendous pressure to abolish the Society of Jesus (known as Jesuits). Pope Clement conveniently died before he could do anything significant about them. Consequently, his successor Clement IV was left with finding a solution concerning what to do about the Jesuits. And so, he was confronted with the perilous task of removing them. When he signed the decree abolishing the Jesuit Order he said, “I have signed my death warrant”. Within nine months he was dead. Suspecting the Jesuits were responsible, many senior churchmen considered that poisoning was the probable cause for his death.

The Jesuits have been expelled from more countries, states, and cities than any other religious order – 83 cities, states and countries. They are notorious for their political intrigue and have frequently engaged in subversive plots against the entities that eventually expelled them. They are known for their deception, spying, infiltration, assassination, and revolution. They have seductively worked their way deeply into the field of politics and have secretly plotted the installation of policies designed to enhance their dominance and control throughout the world. ‘The Grand Design Exposed’ authored by John Daniel is one of the most important documents available on the Internet today. The hard copy version has been out of print for quite some time, however, it can be read online at his website listed under the same name.

The Jesuits do not take no for an answer, and when expelled they employ other measures to worm their way back into the political arena using stealth coupled with a variety of means, but always cloaked in secrecy. Keep in mind those words of the Third Jesuit Superior-General, Francis Borgia noted at the beginning of this segment.

Nazi leader Adolf Hitler modeled his SS Troops and political party after the organizational structure of the Jesuits and the Papacy. ‘The Secret History of the Jesuits’, a small book written by Edmond Paris is another one of the most informative books describing the Jesuits. Hitler’s top Nazi leader Heinrich Himmler virtually cloned the Jesuit organization in every detail. In his book, ‘The Jesuits: History and Legend of the Society of Jesus’ author Manfred Barthel quotes Hitler as having said, “I learned much from the Order of the Jesuits”. There is credible evidence suggesting that Hitler was being manipulated and used by the Jesuits. His infamous book ‘Mein Kampf’ was authored not by Hitler but by Jesuit priest Fr. Bernhardt Stempfle. It is interesting to note the fact that the Roman Catholic Institution never excommunicated this murderous dictator from the Roman Catholic Church.

Before being elected, Pope Pius XII signed a concordant with Nazi Catholic Franz von Papen, Hitler’s Vatican agent. Franz von Papen even stated publicly, “The Third Reich is the first world power which not only acknowledges but also puts into practice the high principles of the Papacy.” The Jesuits today operate 28 Jesuit colleges and universities in the U.S. and 48 Jesuit high schools throughout the country. Worldwide, the Jesuits operate some 324 high schools, and 167 colleges and universities. On John Daniel’s website ‘The Grand Design Exposed’, a photo image of President Obama is shown in the Oval Office with a gathering of his National Security and Intelligence staff, who are all 100% Jesuit-trained alumni! This tells you something important that few people grasp. The U.S.A. is controlled and dominated by the Jesuit-Vatican who have indoctrinated students by means of education taught in the halls and corridors of Georgetown University - all within eyesight of the Capitol.

Heads of states have been assassinated by the Jesuits, when they attempted to suppress the influence and political meddling of the Jesuits in national affairs. Some of those assassinated by the Jesuits include: William of Orange, King Henry III, King Henry IV of France, Czars Alexander I and Alexander II of Russia, President Abraham Lincoln, President John F. Kennedy, and Mexican President Benito Pablo Juarez.

President Lincoln knew well the evil nature of the Jesuits. He stated, “It is not against the Confederacy, alone, I am fighting. It is more against the Pope of Rome, his perfidious Jesuits and their blind and blood-thirsty slaves that we have to defend ourselves”. This quote is found in a book titled ‘Fifty Years in the Church of Rome’ written by Jesuit Fr. Charles Chiniquy. President Lincoln defended Fr. Chiniquy in a civil suit in Illinois when he withdrew from the Jesuit Order. Lincoln won his case on behalf of Fr. Chiniquy. When the judge’s ruling was pronounced, Fr. Chiniquy broke down in tears. Abraham Lincoln felt the priest should have been elated but instead the Father expressed concern for Lincoln expressing that his tears were really an indication of his fear for Lincoln’s life.

Public schools never teach who it really was that killed President Abraham Lincoln. But, U.S. Army Brigadier General Thomas Harris wrote the definitive story of Lincoln’s assassination, in ‘Rome’s Responsibility for the Assassination of Abraham Lincoln’. Quoting a comment by General Harris, “The favorite policy of the Jesuits is that of assassination”. Jesuit Suarez, wrote that “it is of faith that the Pope has right of deposing heretical rebel kings. Monarchs so deposed by the Pope are converted into notorious tyrants, and may be killed by the first who can reach them”. This statement is found in the Jesuit document, ‘Defensio Didei’, Book VI, Chapter 4, Nos. 13 & 14.

Some of the most indicting evidence revealing who assassinated President John F. Kennedy may be found in the book authored by Jon Eric Phelps, ‘Vatican Assassins’. The following quote indicts the Vatican: “Knowing that President Kennedy was not going to escalate the Vietnam War, the Intelligence Community began to prepare for his assassination. Cardinal Spellman [Francis Spellman, Archbishop of New York from 1939-1967], through FDR, had arranged the release of “Lucky” Luciano … Now the Cardinal needed a favor. If refused, Spellman could use the entire intelligence community which he had helped to organize, to eliminate any mob boss. If agreed to, new gambling centers would open up, Atlantic City and Las Vegas in particular. Clearly, if the President [JFK] was removed, everyone would acquire more power and wealth, the intelligence community would become more absolute, and the Cardinal would be even more respected by his peers in Rome. Later, in 1964, for the first time in history, the Pope of Rome set foot in Fourteenth Amendment America. Cardinal Spellman had performed well and was rewarded by a visit from his Master, fellow Cold Warrior and Vatican Ratline handler, Cardinal Montini, who was now Pope Paul VI. There is yet another reason for the removal of President Kennedy. He wanted to arm Israel”. John Loftus writes:


“In September, 1962, Kennedy decided to supply Israel with defensive ground-to-air missiles capable of stopping aircraft, but not the Egyptian’s offensive missiles. It was the first arms sale by the U.S. Government to Israel. Kennedy promised the Israelis that as soon as the 1964 election was over, he would break the CIA into a thousand pieces and scatter it to the winds’. With Kennedy’s assassination in November 1963, the Israelis lost the best friend they had in the White House since Truman departed.” This quote is from Nuremberg War Crimes Prosecutor, John Loftus and can be found in his book ‘The Secret War Against the Jews’ published in 1994.


Why did the Vatican Jesuits want to prevent arms sales to Israel at this time? Why did the Jesuit-controlled President Johnson turn his back on the Egyptian army who had moved up through the Sinai desert in preparation for an assault on Israel in 1967? Because the attack upon Israel had to be provoked! The flames of provocation for that attack were fueled by the Jesuits’ International Intelligence Community through Egypt who falsely perceived the weakness of the Israeli army and the supposed abandonment of Israel by the United States. The 1967 Six-Day War, was engineered by Knight of Malta, Chief of the CIA’s Counterintelligence Staff, James Jesus Angleton, and he had one primary purpose - the taking of Jerusalem along with the Temple Mount. The apparent lack of military hardware on the part of Israel provoked the planned attack by Egypt. Consequently, Israel launched a preemptive attack and, in six days, the Holy City of Jerusalem landed in the hands of Rome’s Zionist government.

Had President Kennedy armed Israel, the Egyptians would never have been emboldened to maneuver for war. With no provoked war, there would have been no Israeli attack. With no Israeli attack, Jerusalem would never have been taken by the Zionists, who were controlled by the Jesuit-led Mossad, the national intelligence agency of Israel. With Jerusalem in Arab hands, the Zionists could never rebuild Solomon’s Temple which, unbeknownst to them was planned for the Jesuit’s “infallible” pope.

Jon Eric Phelps states in his book, “It is safe to say that the Jesuit General, using the pope with his most powerful Cardinal, assassinated President Kennedy!”

The Jesuits dominate ALL the powerful secret societies that are shaping the New World Order. The list of secret societies controlled by the Jesuits today include: the Freemasons, the Knights of Malta, the Bilderberg Group, the Knights of Columbus, Opus Dei, all powerful groups in their own right, but still subservient to the Jesuit-controlled Papacy. For many that may seem impossible or out of the question. I thought that to be the case twenty years ago until I ran across an article on the Internet reporting that all the world intelligence services community were holding a conference meeting in Saint Petersburg, Russia. The article remarked that leading Jesuits were present along with representatives from global nations for the two week conference. In discussing President Kennedy’s assassination, John Loftus was noted. As a World War II Nazi War Crimes prosecutor, Judge Loftus was privy to documents and data confirming that the Jesuits control the world’s secret services and intelligence community either through direct oversight or through an infiltrated presence. He has authored such revealing books as, ‘Unholy Trinity: The Vatican, The Nazis, and the Swiss Banks’, ‘The Secret War Against The Jews’, ‘America’s Nazi Secrets’, ‘Unholy Trinity: The Vatican, The Nazis, and Soviet Intelligence’, and ‘Ratlines: How the Vatican’s Nazi Networks Betrayed Western Intelligence to the Soviets’.

The Jesuits are responsible for fomenting the two world wars and the escalation of the Vietnam War after the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Edmond Paris goes into the first two world wars in his book, ‘The Secret History of the Jesuits’. Sir Avro Manhattan discusses the background of the Vietnam War in his book, ‘Vietnam: Why Did We Go?’ Most Americans are unaware that the U.S.A. went to war with Vietnam, not over the Domino Theory of Communism in Asia, but because, the Vietnamese government defeated the French Catholic colonists who were driven out of the nation by Vietnam’s Buddhists. The “U.S.A. was the hammer, and Vietnam was the nail”, to paraphrase a statement used by U.S. General Wesley Clark. 58,000+ American young men and women died simply to punish the nation of Vietnam for expelling the French Catholic colonists. The American public was sold the bogus theory of “Falling Dominoes” and that Communism had to be stopped before it engulfed all of Southeast Asia.

The simple fact of the matter is that the Jesuit-controlled Vatican exercises control over the American government through the Jesuit Papal American headquarters at Georgetown University.

The documented atrocities committed by the Jesuits, particularly those under the Ustaše (members of the Ustaša – Croatian Revolutionary Movement) are particularly disturbing and shocking, especially since there are actual photographs of such evil. This didn’t happen hundreds of years ago. It happened in the 1940’s! This was carried out under the rule of Ante Pavelic, a Catholic Croatian Fascist leader, who occupied parts of Yugoslavia for Fascist Italy and Fascist Germany, and ultimately the Papacy. For many Yugoslavs it was either ‘convert’ to Catholicism or be brutally tortured and killed.

It was previously noted that Pope Clement IV expelled the Jesuits. The Papacy suffered great humiliation at the hands of Napoleon. After Pope Pius VII was freed from imprisonment in the south of France, he was returned to Rome, and his first order of business was to restore the Jesuits to full status. Rome did not want to be deprived again of the services of the Jesuits, no matter how burdensome this service was to the Church of Rome, and its allies. In the agreement to rescue Rome [the church’s hierarchy] from their predicament of losing its world control to the Protestant Reformation, and to preserve the spiritual and temporal supremacy which the popes had “usurped” during the Middle Ages, Rome sold the Roman Catholic Church out to the Society of Jesus; and, in essence, the popes surrendered themselves back into Jesuit hands. The details of this historical period are well documented in John Daniel’s book, ‘The Grand Design Exposed’ on page 64.

Jesuits are among the most intelligent and well educated Roman Catholics. They spend upwards of twelve years in academic studies, preparing for their mission assignments. They are trained to take either the ‘pro’ or the ‘con’ position, meaning they are schooled to take opposite sides of the same issue. This enables them to be perceived as opponents to one another. The Jesuits plan always includes a “Plan B” and they plan to win regardless of the outcome. Jesuits have no such thing as a “five-year plan” but are instead oriented toward long-term “fifty-year” or “hundred-year” plans. Over the decades and centuries, they have infiltrated Protestant colleges and seminaries, while assuming the mantle of wolves in sheep’s skins. In a series of articles I am writing, entitled “The Truth Shall Make You Free”, Part 7 is about the “Secret Instructions of the Jesuits”.

In order for one to fully understand how the Jesuits have become spies and have infiltrated all Protestant denominations and institutions, Lucifer has empowered the Roman Catholic Church to persecute the church of Jesus Christ by means of deception, distraction, division, misinformation, and disinformation. Roman Catholicism is all about “SUN” worship and not “SON” worship. They use words and language that have both an overt as well as a covert meaning. Duplicity is a cover in their grand scheme of deception.

During the period of the Dark Ages, the Roman Catholic Institution persecuted those who proclaimed the truth of Jesus Christ. They banned people from reading the Bible, while limiting its availability and opposed or prevented its translation into other languages except Latin. They burned Bibles and tortured and killed those who had them. During the Dark Ages and the Inquisition, the Roman Catholic Church was responsible for killing between 50 and 500 million people, mostly Christians.

With the invention of the printing press, things began to change, and the Word of God was finally able to be translated into English. Men who became Protestant Reformers were now able to read the Bible. They found salvation through faith, apart from works, in the pure Gospel of Jesus Christ. More importantly, they identified the Antichrist. When they read the books of Daniel and Revelation, they determined that the Roman Catholic Church was the “Antichrist”, the “Whore of Babylon”, and that it was guilty of the blood of the saints.

During the Reformation, the Papacy suffered a major setback. The help of the monastic orders was sought, but they were so decadent that they had lost the respect of the people. The Dominicans and Franciscans, peddling relics and indulgences, had become the brunt of ridicule and mockery. It was but a short while later when the Jesuits gained greater influence. They grew more powerful and comprehensive year by year, employing science, art, culture, politics, foreign missions, trade, and industry. They began to preach, as Protestants were accustomed to doing, in the streets and marts, coming to be among the most eloquent preachers of the age. The churches were too small to accommodate the multitudes that flocked to hear them.
At Rome, they were scattered throughout the various churches. They began to spread throughout Italy, Portugal, Germany, Austria and Bavaria and actually hemmed in the Protestant movement on all sides. Some cities, such as Ingolstadt and Cologne, Bavaria, opened their doors while others opposed them.

In 1558, Diego Laynez was elected Second Superior-General of the Jesuit Order. He successfully exerted his power and skill on behalf of Papal supremacy at the Council of Trent. The Jesuits eventually became entrenched in universities throughout Europe and they were prized as some of the best teachers in the land. Even Protestants began to send their children to them because of the scholastic excellence and progress they could make.

The basic conflict between Protestantism and Catholicism was irreconcilable. Romanists believed in the authority of the church while the Protestants believed the Bible warranted sole supremacy. The one yielded his conscience to the priest; the other to God alone. The Romanists believed in the pope as the visible representative of Jesus Christ on earth; the Protestants looked, instead, upon the pope as the Antichrist. The one regarded the church, along with its hierarchy as the depository of all spiritual truth looking upon the clergy as ministers of the church and were content to leave the Bible to the learned. The Protestants on the other hand, held that the Bible was to be diligently and reverently studied by all, as the Word of God. The one dreaded its spread as tending to lean towards heresy; the other multiplied translations as an assurance of soundness, and sought to introduce them to every household and village. The two systems stood forth in absolute and irreconcilable opposition at the Council of Trent, where the Jesuit-controlled Council expressly condemned what the Reformation taught.

Beginning in 1545 under Pope Paul III and ending in 1563 under Pope Pius IV, the Council of Trent crystalized its actions into decrees that became permanent law of the Roman Catholic Institution. Reformation truths were rejected and stigmatized as harmful or destructive heresy. In one sense the Council of Trent became the culmination of the Counter-Reformation. It was Rome’s definitive answer to the Reformation.

The molding Jesuit influence was attested to by two noted Jesuits, Alfonso Salmerón and Diego Laynez, who served as the pope’s theologians, and had been urged by Ignatius of Loyola to resist all innovation in doctrine. They were invited to preach during the Council of Trent and soon ingratiated themselves into the goodwill of the delegates. Because of their unusual knowledge of the church fathers, the conclusions of scholastic philosophy, and of Catholic doctrine, they came to wield a predominant influence in the Council meetings.

The early Protestant Reformers taught the 70th Week of Daniel and that it followed the 69th Week. The Geneva Bible of 1553 and 1599 went a long way to open up the understanding of the Great Tribulation but did not answer many of the issues that Dispensationalism resolves. I have read the study notes of the Geneva 1599 Bible and it clearly testifies to the position held by Preterists, which teaches that all prophecies were fulfilled by the time of the destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D. It taught that Rome sent the Roman army to put down rebellion in the Empire and to desolate the Jews, so it had nothing to do with an end-times Antichrist. When the KJV translators came along they did not have the study notes of the Geneva Bible, and they were unavailable to future generations, which allowed Jesuit deception to creep into the Reformation church.

About a decade ago, the re-formatting and publishing of the Geneva Bible was hailed by the likes of the late Dr. D.J. Kennedy as the Bible to own and use. Dr. Kennedy was a Preterist, until his death in 2007, and he did not accept the idea of the ‘Gap’ between the 69th Week and 70th Week of Daniel 9:24-27. Their dual message of salvation through faith in Jesus Christ apart from works, together with the message that Papal Rome is the Antichrist, changed the course of history.

When Catholic monk Martin Luther posted his "Ninety-Five Thesis” in 1517, it was widely regarded as the initial catalyst for the Protestant Reformation. It was the Protestant Reformation that ushered in the Great Awakening where worldwide missions led to millions of people coming to Jesus. Satan no doubt was livid as he watched God spread His Holy Word and the saving Gospel around the world, so the deceiver devised a new plan.

The Roman Catholic Institution empowered the Jesuits to counter the Reformation. In 1545 A.D., they started meeting at what is called the Council of Trent. One of its main purposes was to plan a counter-attack against Martin Luther and the other Protestant Reformers. To do all this they empowered the Jesuits, who were a secret military order founded by Ignatius de Loyola. The name ‘Society of Jesus’ sounded so Christian-like and proved to be a horrible nightmare disaster of satanic proportions. Many Protestants refer to them as the Society of Satan, a well-deserved title.

The Jesuit agenda was carried out through the Inquisition and through torture, but also through theology and deception. The Vatican granted the Jesuits the commission of bringing Protestantism back to the “Mother Church”. When you see how the Lutheran Church has been falling all over itself to achieve “unity” with Rome you can understand just how successful they have been.

Central to this plan, was the need to deflect any and all accusations that the Papacy was the Antichrist beast system. Since most people cannot see that the Jesuits are a covert military order of the Roman Catholic Institution and not just parish priests, they employ ‘fifth column’ tactics to infiltrate every institution they seek to destroy. Instead of attacking from the outside, where their work can be seen, they covertly attack from within. To implement their deceptions inside the walls of orthodox Christianity, the Jesuits infiltrate the very thing they wish to destroy. They have pretended to be Christian while infiltrating Christian institutions. For some time following the launching of the Reformation, Roman Catholic leadership carefully avoided exposition of the prophecies of Daniel and the Apocalypse. They seemed unable to ward off the force of the incriminating Protestant applications concerning Antichrist, which were undermining the very foundation of the Catholic position. Upon the first outbreak of Luther’s anti-papal protest two Roman Catholic doctors of theology, Frs. Sylvester Prierias and Johann Maier von Eck, in the true spirit of the Fifth Lateran Council (1512-1517) boldly reasserted the Lateran theory and declaring the papal dominion to be Daniel’s fifth monarchy, or reign of the saints, thereby identifying the existing Roman church with New Jerusalem.

But the reformers, with declarations by pen and voice, forcefully stated that the Papacy was the specified Antichrist of Bible prophecy. The symbols of Daniel, Paul, and John were applied with tremendous effect. Hundreds of books and tracts impressed their contention upon the consciousness of Europe. Indeed it gained so great a hold upon the minds of men that Rome, in alarm, saw that she must successfully counteract this identification of Antichrist with the Papacy, or lose the battle. The Jesuits were summoned to aid in the extremity, and cleverly provide the very method needed both for defense and for attack. From the ranks of the Jesuits, two stalwarts arose, determined to lift the stigma from the Papacy, by locating Antichrist at some point elsewhere so that he could not be applied to the Roman church. It was clearly a crisis of major proportions.

Rome’s answer to the Protestant Reformation was twofold, though actually conflicting and contradictory in results. Through the Jesuits Francisco Ribera, of Salamanca, Spain, and Robert Bellarmine, of Rome, the Papacy put forth her “Futurist” interpretation. Almost simultaneously Luis Alcazar, a Spanish Jesuit of Seville, advanced the conflicting “Preterist” interpretation. These were designed to meet and overwhelm the Historical interpretation of the Protestants. Though mutually exclusive, either Jesuit alternative suited the great objective equally well, as both thrust aside the application of the prophecies from the existing Church of Rome. The one (“Preterism”) accomplished it by making prophecy stop altogether short of Papal Rome’s career beginning. The other (“Futurism”) achieved it by making it overlap the immense era of Papal dominance, crowding out Antichrist into a small fragment of time in the still distant future, just before the Great Tribulation. It is sometimes called or referred to as the “Gap” theory. I should add here that both Roman Catholics and Protestants agree as to the origin of these two different interpretations. If you are looking for a date identifying when the “Preterist” and “Futurist” schools of thought originated, it would be 1591 A.D. for the Futurist and 1614 A.D. for the Preterist positions.

They countered accusations by creating concepts of an end-times 70th Week of Daniel, featuring a one man Antichrist. The Roman Catholic Church enlisted Jesuit Priest Francisco Ribera, a brilliant man with a doctorate in theology, to write a 500-page commentary with an opposing view, where he interpreted prophecies in the books of Daniel and Revelation, to create an end-time 7-year tribulation Antichrist.

Ribera applied all of Revelation to the end-time rather than to the history of the church. His explanation was that the prophecies apply only to a single sinister man who will arise up at the end of time; instead of a beast, which the Bible says is a powerful kingdom (the Roman Catholic Institution). He said that the Antichrist would be an infidel from outside the church of God; instead of someone who presents himself as Christ (i.e. the pope, who calls himself the Vicar of Christ). He said that the Antichrist would make a 7-year peace agreement with the Jews. The most important passage that Ribera manipulated is the 70 Weeks of Daniel’s prophecy in Daniel 9:24-27. He applied the 70th Week of Daniel to an end times Antichrist, and thus replacing the Roman Church view of the 7-year period of Jesus’ New Covenant being offered to the house of Israel from 27-34 A.D.

Because of the end times deceptions that are based upon them, these may be the four most important prophecy verses in the entire Bible. I and many Dispensational scholars believe this to be the case. The intent was to offer a Bible study that proves that the Covenant of the 70th Week of Daniel was from Jesus Christ and not an end time Antichrist. This idea became known as “Futurism” thereby deferring all accusations away from the Roman Catholic Church and the Papacy. This solved the problem for Rome as being the Antichrist and so they quickly adopted this viewpoint as the Church’s official position on the Antichrist.

Prophecies in Daniel and Revelation tell us about the battle between Jesus and Satan throughout history, from the time they were written to or about Jesus’ Second Coming. The ‘Best of Revelation’, the ‘Little Horn of Daniel’, the ‘Son of Perdition’ and the ‘Babylonian Harlot’, all apply to the history of the Antichrist and the Roman Catholic Church, who proclaims to be Christian, but has opposed true Christianity throughout history. This then came to be known as “Historicism”. It was the common belief held by the majority of the Protestant Reformers. The Catholic Church tried to counter it with Preterism and Futurism during the Counter Reformation era. This alternate view served to bolster the Catholic Church's position against attacks by Protestants, and is viewed as a Catholic defense against the Protestant Historicist view which identified the Roman Catholic Church as a persecuting apostasy and the Pope with the Anti-Christ.

Lucifer has used both Jesuit-controlled false prophets and Christians who were misled to unwittingly promote the idea of “Futurism”. Following closely behind Francisco Ribera, another brilliant Jesuit scholar emerged named Cardinal Robert Bellarmine of Rome. Cardinal Bellarmine promoted Ribera’s concept in his work “Polemic Lectures Concerning the Disputed points of the Christian Belief Against the Heretics of this Time”. His writings claimed that Paul, Daniel, and John had nothing whatsoever to say about the Papal power. He taught that Antichrist was a single individual who would not rule until the very end of time and his teachings won general acceptance among Roman Catholics.

For almost 200 years after the Council of Trent, Jesuit “Futurism” remained largely within Catholicism. For three centuries, the “Futurism” of Fr. Francisco Ribera never posed a positive threat to Protestants worldwide, and was virtually confined to the cathedrals of the Roman Church. Ribera’s manipulation of the Biblical text was rejected for hundreds of years, by discerning students of the Bible, who believed differently. Meanwhile, Jesuits continued to persist with their plan to cause Protestants to adopt this doctrine.

Since its inception, Ribera’s basic thesis has remained virtually unchanged. He assigned the first few chapters of the Apocalypse to ancient Rome, in John’s own time; the rest he restricted to a literal three-and-a-half year reign of the infidel Antichrist, who would bitterly oppose and blaspheme the saints just before the Second Coming. He taught that Antichrist would be a single individual, who would rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem, abolish the Christian religion, deny Christ Jesus, be received by the Jews, pretend to be God, and conquer the world – all in this brief space of three-and-a-half years!

It is interesting to note how the Jesuits never anticipated that future generations would be able to refine the futurist theory to how it is presently represented today. As it turns out the Preterist theory by definition does not believe that there is a literal millennial reign of Christ Jesus on earth. As far as the Preterist is concerned, the book of Revelation is reduced to little more than a relic of antiquity, with no message of importance for later generations. It eliminates God’s future dealings with Israel, teaching that God is done with them nationally. The Preterist thesis is that all the events of the book of Revelation were fulfilled during the days of either Nero or Domitian. The book is concerned only with events of the first century.

The Historical theory leads to post-millennialism, the belief that Christ Jesus will return at the end of the millennial age. The multiplicity of the interpretation of metaphors and symbols quickly becomes intolerably influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions. The Historical thesis is a panorama of church history, from the initiation of the apostolic era to the consummation of the age.

The Idealist theory leads to the amillennial view that there is no literal reign of Christ Jesus on earth for one thousand years as noted in chapter 20 of Revelation (not once but 6X times). Like the Historical theory, the multiplicity of the interpretation of metaphors and symbols quickly become intolerably subjective. The Idealist thesis states that the Apocalypse is to be developed as a representation of actual events, whether past or future. The book is only a symbol or metaphor depicting the great struggle between good and evil.

The Futuristic theory remains the only belief that Christ Jesus will return to usher in the millennial age. It alone provides perfect harmony of the entire Bible. Far fewer interpretive enigmas are problematic with this approach. The “Futuristic” thesis begins with chapter four of the book of Revelation. The events described belong to a future age and constitutes a marvelous prophecy of God’s program for the consummation of the age. It views the book of the Revelation of Jesus Christ as an overview or outline of events in the life of the Jews.

Prophetically speaking, God used the Jesuits in such a way that what they meant for evil and deception to save the pope’s bacon; however, God has used their plan for God’s intended good! As Scripture states in Genesis 50:20. “But as for you, ye thought evil against me, but God meant it unto good, to bring to pass, as it is this day, to save much people alive”.

The inevitable conclusion of those who studied these prophesies in Scripture, before and during the Protestant Reformation, was that there was only one entity that fit all the above characteristics: and that was the Papal dynasty of the Roman Catholic Institution. Is it any wonder that the Catholic Church was so violently opposed to the Scriptures being available for everyone to read for themselves? The stir created during the Reformation caused the Fifth Lateran Council of 1512-1517 to strictly forbid anyone from publishing a book without prior censorship, and prohibited anyone from preaching on the subject of the Antichrist.

Critics of the “Futurist” theory, and also the Pre-Tribulation Rapture are always quick to blame modern scholars for getting their Dispensational theology from the Jesuit Francisco Ribera as if that somehow proves the Pre-Tribulation Rapture doctrine is wrong. Fr. Ribera published his 500-page commentary on the book of Revelation in 1590. He died shortly thereafter in 1591 at the age of fifty-four. In hindsight, it is surprising to realize just how close his Futurism theory is and even so similar when compared with Dispensationalism, the Pre-Tribulation Rapture, Daniel’s 70th Week, and the Antichrist.

The fact remains that at the Council of Trent, the Jesuits were commissioned specifically by the pope to develop a new interpretation of the Scriptures that would counteract the Protestant Reformers application of the Bible’s Antichrist application to the Roman Catholic Church. Francisco Ribera was a doctor of theology and a brilliant Jesuit priest from Spain. Like Martin Luther, Francisco Ribera also read the Bible’s prophecies by candlelight - the prophecies of the Antichrist, the little horn, the man of sin, and the Beast. But because of his dedication and devotion to the Papacy, he came to conclusions vastly different from those of the Protestants.

For three centuries, the “Futurism” of Francisco Ribera never posed a threat to Protestantism. It was contained within Roman Catholicism. Interestingly, Fr. Francisco Ribera unwittingly and unsuspectingly handed the substance of what we call Dispensational Pre-Tribulationalism to the Protestants. Note the points that Fr. Franciso Ribera makes about the Antichrist (which he saw as an infidel outside of the church), and his agenda:

Along with Fr. Francisco Ribera and Cardinal Robert Bellarmine, Manuel De Lacunza, a Jesuit from Chile, wrote a manuscript in Spanish titled: “The Coming of the Messiah in Glory and Majesty”. In order to give his book better acceptance in Protestantism which was his intended audience, Lacunza wrote under an assumed Jewish name to obscure the fact that he was a Catholic. Also, an advocate of “Futurism”, Lacunza deliberately attempted to take the pressure off the Papacy by proposing the Antichrist was still off in the distant future. Jesuit deceit to fool the Protestant reformers and laity came back to haunt the Vatican in the centuries that followed since then.

The point to keep mindful of here is that despite all the efforts of several Jesuit scholars who were engaged in the propagation of deception by developing the “Futuristic” theory, they unwittingly and unintentionally really did lay the ground work which later assisted Protestant scholars who would come along later to fine-tune the “Futuristic” theory which ultimately has become the basis for the Dispensationalist view, the Pre-Tribulation Rapture teaching, Daniel’s 70th Week, a rebuilt Temple, and the Seven Year Tribulation doctrine. Keep in mind, God presents the challenge in Proverbs 25:2 to search the Scriptures and discover His Truths and the Secrets of the Creator. From 10+ years of seminary education, I know there is not a single Bible doctrine, not one, that is virtually laid on your plate as a package deal. Instead it demands and requires that Biblical doctrine can only be defined by studying the whole counsel of God!

That being said, those critical of Dispensationalism and the Pre-Tribulation Rapture, simply because the teaching originated within the Jesuits, lacks enough substance to dismiss the entire concept of “Futurism” as errant. In fact, perhaps the named individuals above are deserving of our thanks, a special thanks for “turning over the soil” (i.e., Scripture). I am not saying that “Futurism” is exclusively a Jesuit theory; on the contrary, we will find that there are many others who wrote of the Pre-Tribulation doctrine far earlier than the Reformation Era. Let us never forget and be reminded of the fact that it was the Apostle Paul who first taught the Pre-Tribulation doctrine. The early church fathers up through the beginning of the fourth century believed in the doctrine of Imminence and Millennialism.

I am suggesting that those with an axe to grind against the Pre-Tribulation doctrine do so with such prejudiced bias which cannot really be substantiated or supported by using a “straw man” argument simply by framing Jesuit theologians for fraudulently creating the “Futurist” theology. To begin with, they were learned theologians. Jesuits undergo twelve years of academic excellence in higher education. They are formidable scholars and debaters, and few Protestants are able to equal or best them in matters of Bible hermeneutics. I am inferring that many of those who oppose the Pre-Tribulation doctrine, are themselves lacking in their own qualifications to even consider questioning the validity of the likes of Fr. Francisco Ribera.

Don’t lose sight of the fact that the Pre-Tribulation Rapture is not dependent on who may have noticed it first and taught certain elements of it. Pre-Tribulation is valid only if it is supported by Scripture. At the end of the day, the Bible becomes the definitive authority and arbitrator.

Any question or conflict over the issue concerning “gaps” is well established showing where various passages reveal over 24 examples throughout the Bible describing where “gaps” have taken place from first mention to its actual fulfillment. Perhaps the greatest example of a “gap” is identified where Jesus of Nazareth read Himself from the scroll of Isaiah 61:1-2, only to stop at a “comma” and close the scroll without finishing the rest of the passage. This meant that the prophecy He read is the part that was being fulfilled at that specific moment while the balance of the prophecy was to be realized at a later point in time. This experience is recorded picked up in the Gospel of Luke 4:17-21. The Creator placed these “gaps” as a means of validating the integrity of the structure of the Divine Corpus [Old/New Testaments], particularly so to establish the connectedness between what we call the Old and New Testaments. They bridge both time and context to affirm its structural integrity.

There are a few false assumptions made by those who would deny the Pre-Tribulation rapture because of its supposed Jesuit origins.

Consider these:

False assumption #1: They assume that, because they died for their faith, the reformers and martyrs, must have had an absolutely correct and perfect view of prophecy. This assumption elevates men above Scripture. The men of the Protestant Reformation died because they fought against revering men, they died for the right of all men to personally read, study and respect Scripture more than men. Therefore, putting the prophetic beliefs of the reformers and martyrs upon a pedestal is exactly the opposite of the principles for which they fought and died.

If the reformers had the ability, the right, and the freedom to make Christ Jesus their head instead of the pope, and if they trusted the words of Jesus that He would lead them into truth, and if they trusted in their intellectual capability to read and comprehend the Scriptures, then there is nothing stopping us today from doing the exact same thing ourselves.

Speaking of the beliefs of the reformers; there were many early English Bible translations before the KJV Bible in 1611. In at least six of those early English translations from the 1300’s to the 1500’s, the Greek word “Apostasia” in 2nd Thessalonians 2:3 was originally translated “departure” or “departing”, instead of “falling away” which now appears in the KJV, or “rebellion” in other modern translations. What is not commonly known, unless you are a history student such as myself, by the public today is that there were serious efforts, by the Jesuits, underway to return England back under the power and control of the Papacy. The KJV translators were doing something that would appease the Jesuits, and that we would take issue with today, and that was their attempt at being politically correct, which resulted in conceding to watering down the English translation of the KJV Bible. A specific example of this diluting of the meaning is the most important word that deals with the Rapture in the translation of the word “Apostasia”. In six previous published Bibles (English language Bibles) the translators had translated the word to read “departure” and the KJV translators watered it down by using the word “falling away”.

False Assumption #2: They assume that the “Futurist” view of a future Antichrist is incompatible with the “historicist” view that the pope is the Antichrist. Nothing could be further from the truth. There are often double or multiple references and double or multiple fulfillments in Scripture. Just because there is an “Antichrist to come”, it does not mean there cannot now be any antichrists to come, or that the existence of antichrists were not present at the time Scripture was written. “Futurism,” and the view of the Pre-Tribulation Rapture, does not take the that off the Papacy or eliminate its culpability.

This point is made clear in 1st John 2:18 and 1st John 4:3, in the use of the phrases, “even now are there many antichrist”, and “even now already is it in the world”.


Therefore, to conclude that the issue speaks of one where the Antichrist must either be interpreted as coming only in the future, or existing now in the present only, or is a past event is a huge fabrication. Anyone can read the Scriptures and easily arrive at the answer that Scripture means that it can have both understandings! The “either/or” thought process is inconsistent with the text. The point is Fr. Francisco Ribera did not teach the Pre-Tribulation doctrine, but merely taught “Futurism”. I would argue that Fr. Francisco Ribera was not the first, and I will list many before him shortly who did teach the Pre-Tribulation Rapture doctrine, including the Apostle Paul.

False assumption #3: Often we hear opponents of the Pre-Tribulation doctrine argue that Fr. Francisco Ribera invented the Pre-Tribulation Rapture. Again, that is completely false if not a distortion of Fr. Ribera’s words altogether. Ribera did not teach a Pre-Tribulation Rapture, he taught primarily “Futurism”, and that an Antichrist was to come in the future.

False assumption #4: Some critics claim, on the one hand, that the few thousands of early reformers who were killed for their faith somehow proves that their prophetic interpretation of “Historicism” was true. On the other hand, these same critics who deny the rapture will claim that the millions in China who were taught about the Pre-Tribulation rapture and were killed for their faith merely proves that they had the wrong prophetic view. This view follows an errant line of reasoning and logic because there is a gross inconsistency in the application of this principle which views martyrs for their faith as automatically having the right prophetic views. An excellent example of this is those who will create a “straw man” argument, using a Christian named Corrie Ten Boom who went through the horrors of the Jewish Holocaust, and who said that the doctrine of the Pre-Tribulation Rapture deceived many Christians in China who were martyred because they were not prepared to be persecuted, because they were taught that persecution would only come in the future. Corrie Ten Boom’s logic and reasoning are deeply flawed but that does not stop the Pre-Tribulation Rapture critics from quoting her.

To revere Corrie Ten Boom’s evaluation of the Rapture as somehow worthy of adulation because she suffered at the hands of the Nazis is the same old error of elevating the opinion of men above what the Word of God says. A number of people who oppose the Pre-Tribulation Rapture view quote her as if she was an apostle in her day.

In my series “Pre-Tribulation Truth - 5”, I shared a partial list of early Church Fathers and leaders who believed in and wrote about the concept of Imminence and the Pre-Tribulation Rapture, noted here by Dr. H. Wayne House, a renowned and well-respected Pre-Tribulation scholar. Here are the names of some of the early Christians who believed and taught about the idea of Pre-Tribulationism:

Another Counter-Reformation Jesuit who wrote on behalf of the traditional “Historicism” held by Protestantism was proposed by the Spanish Jesuit Luis De Alcazar (1554-1613), who wrote a commentary nearly 900 pages long called ‘Investigation of the Hidden Sense of the Apocalypse’. In it, he proposed that ALL of the book of Revelation applied to the era of pagan Rome and the first six centuries of Christianity.

Alcazar stated:

Alcazar found no application of prophecy to the middle ages or to the Papacy. The fact that his work differed so greatly from that put forth by Fr. Francisco Ribera or Cardinal Robert Bellarmine, was of no consequence to the Jesuits. The sole intent in all of their writings was to deflect the focus off the Protestant conclusion that the Papacy was seen as the Antichrist. Roman Catholicism was determined to retain religious and temporal power at all costs. It was losing adherents to the Reformation and the Jesuits came along at the right time to see that Rome held the reins of power, be it religious or temporal. It was a last ditch effort to thwart the Reformation and to counter all claims of the Reformers, regardless of whether the line of reasoning was scripturally sound or not.

The intent of both “Futurism” and “Preterism” was to implant a diversion, and a distraction to counter the Protestant Historical interpretation by presenting alternatives, no matter how implausible they might be. The result is evident when one notices the outcome of the effect to distract the world away from Rome. The Jesuits were able to place the Antichrist outside the Middle Ages and the Reformation Period. Fr. Francisco Ribera’s “Futurism” put the Antichrist’s literal three-and-a-half-years into the Future. Whereas, Alcazar’s “Preterism” identified the Antichrist as Nero.

What the Jesuits never counted on was the fact that Fr. Francisco Ribera was such a tremendous Bible scholar that he virtually gave later scholars and theologians enough of a basis for “Futurism”, by framing the structure and providing room for future refinement as a system of modern-day Dispensationalism theology. The scenario that Fr. Ribera presented actually became the essence of the foundational groundwork for the likes of John Nelson Darby in 1827-1828 and to become the Dispensational school of theology.

John Nelson Darby states that it was the 32nd chapter of Isaiah that convinced him that God was not through with Israel and that God had more to deal with in regards to mankind in the future. In all likelihood, there is no group of theologians alive today who have greater regrets for Fr. Francisco Ribera’s work than the Jesuits.

The irony behind the reasons the Jesuits spawned fallacies meant to inject propaganda into Biblical doctrine was that they were intended to deflect criticism away from the Papacy. Instead, the basis of their teaching has become the foundation of the Dispensational school of theology and can only be understood in God’s realm as a catalyst for “Futurism”. As a tactic designed to discredit their own basic work, the Jesuits have resorted to referring to Ribera’s work as a Jesuit lie. The opponents of Dispensational Theology and the Pre-Tribulation Rapture choose to parrot these claims without ever reading for themselves the work of Fr. Francisco Ribera so that they can fairly evaluate his work from an educated and correct perspective.

The likelihood of any critic of the Pre-Tribulation Rapture having ever read Fr. Francisco Ribera is close to zero, and the reason for this is, Fr. Francisco Ribera’s writings was it has never been translated into English


Pastor Bob





19